Westlaw Today recently featured an article by Lathrop GPM attorneys Craig Miller and Cassie Doutt, originally published in the firm’s The Franchise Memorandum blog, titled “Massachusetts Federal Court Concludes Incentive Program and Secondary Market Allegations Fail to State Price Discrimination Claim.”
The article focuses on a Massachusetts court decision dismissing Robinson-Patman Act claims after a manufacturer increased prices when plaintiffs withdrew from a minimum-advertised price (MAP) program. The court found the price change lawful, as the plaintiffs chose to leave the program, forfeiting discounts. It also rejected claims tied to secondary market sales, citing insufficient evidence of disparate treatment.
For business leaders, this ruling reinforces the defensibility of clear incentive programs and MAP structures and highlights the necessity of well-documented contractual terms.
Read the Westlaw Today piece here [SUBSCRIPTION REQUIRED]: Massachusetts Federal Court Concludes Incentive Program and Secondary Market Allegations Fail to State Price Discrimination Claim